Debate about abortion

Firearms cause 8,500 deaths per year – less than the number caused by clubs or hammers. Abortions cause 1,200,000 deaths per year. Why is our nation in such a frenzy over gun control, and so complacent about the murder of so many innocent babies? Do we have our priorities in the right order? – James D. Lemon, San Diego

In response to “Bill might make abortion more accessible” (Local, Jan. 23): Are these now our American values? Weeks of protests and debates over gun control follow the mental patient shooting of 20 schoolchildren. But after the deaths of 50 million babies since Roe v. Wade, as their own mother’s “choice,” we have proposals to “make abortion more accessible”? – Margaret L. Johnson, La Mesa

Letters and commentary policy

The U-T welcomes and encourages community dialogue on important public matters. Please visit this page for more details on our letters and commentaries policy.

The Humane Society has incredible success in Sacramento, in getting protection for animals of every kind, because animals are defenseless, can’t speak on their own behalf and need our protection. That makes sense. Let’s look at how this works in our state capital. Assembly Bill 2304, introduced by Assemblyman Martin Garrick, R-Solana Beach, was supposed to allow pet groomers to be able to do mobile teeth cleanings on pets, a practice currently limited to Veterinarians. This bill was opposed by most veterinarian groups and by the State Humane Association of California because of their concerns that only highly trained Veterinarians were capable of cleaning a dogs teeth without harming them.

Now fast forward to today in Sacramento. San Diego Assemblywoman Tony Atkins (D) introduced legislation that would allow up to 24,000 trained nurse practitioners, nurse midwifes and physician assistants to perform abortions.

Let me get this straight, teeth cleaning is a more dangerous procedure than an abortion and pets get more protection than human patients? Oh yeah, and who’s going to give consideration to the child in the womb. Maybe if we called the fetus an animal, instead of a tissue mass, the Humane Society would put their considerable political weight into protecting them. – Paul Sprecco, Lakeside

His first point is that it is erroneous to call the 50 million killed since 1973 “babies” He claims that unless an embryo or fetus is capable of surviving outside of the womb, it is like a parasite using the uterus as a host. I find this analogy disgusting. A parasite is a nasty thing indeed. Something to poison and get rid of.

Redding also says that an embryo or fetus is no more a baby than an acorn is an oak. It would be more accurate to say that a baby in utero is like an acorn that had been planted, has germinated, and sprouted. One could rip out the baby tree at any time, and then it would never become the mighty oak. There is one important difference: the oak does not have a beating heart.

Redding then mentions that men do not have to endure the consequences of pregnancy. Those “consequences” as he calls them, is a living human being, which is a wonderful thing. Also, being a man, Redding should not dare to comment on what it is like, as he has never experienced it.